This post gives an excellent primer on "toxic diversity" as opposed to genuine diversity. Here's an example:
Toxic "diversity" scolds; genuine diversity invites. Toxic "diversity" is Brie Larson contemptuously dismissing the opinions of "40-year-old white dudes" because a certain movie supposedly "wasn't made for them." Genuine diversity says, "We wanted to try something a little different, but we hope everyone will like it."Read the whole thing.
Toxic "diversity" rejects evidence; genuine diversity is evidence-based. Toxic "diversity" asserts that all disparities are the result of "the cis-hetero patriarchy" or "white supremacy." Genuine diversity understands that the causes of such disparities are most likely multivariate; further, it acknowledges indisputable progress. It is a documented fact, for example, that while women are the minority in certain hard STEM fields, they now dominate higher education at both the undergraduate and graduate level pretty much everywhere else. It is also a fact that while significant wealth gaps remain, most African Americans do not live in poverty. Genuine diversity doesn't deny that racism and sexism exist - or that certain policies need to be tweaked to allow for greater equality of opportunity - but its approach to apparent injustice is fundamentally grounded in reality.